How can I confirm that I'm following the right people...

[askyourgran]

Dotty mentioned that George Litherland b1787 and Mary Capewell are the parents of John Litherland b1812 (married to Ruth Osborn/Guest, in 1843).
There are several Mary Capewells (one was born on the canal and died in the canal at Stour?) so I'm not sure which one I'm chasing.
I also looked up the Swift and Rowley public family trees on ancestry as far as I could, but then I realised they may not necessarily be my line of the family. I had a real run at finding George b 1754 and Mary richardson,William b1717 and Elizabeth smith b1725? John b1695 and Sarah Mathew 1697, John 1670 and Margaret Spooner 1670 (I think her relative in ended up in Broadmoor) Edward 1634 and Isobel Stanton. Humphrey 1600 and Maria hyde.
I joined the Library to get into the ancestry files, but the OH has been in hospital and atm I can't get out long enough to follow these up along with the probate records for some of them, will they be useful?

[dotty.]

Pre 1858 wills and admons for the Diocese of Lichfield are indexed to 1730 only so far, if any of the Litherlands owned property worth over £5 they may well have left a will and possibly an inventory as well. They can be very useful to identify exact places of residence and relatiinships, the County Record Office is also the Diocesan Record Office, some CROs have good online indexing, Lichfield is ok but might not be as fully indexed date wise as you need at the moment.






http://www.staffordsh...archService/home.aspx

[dotty.]

sorry My laptop is playing up! As for the actual marriages, it is often useful to look at the original entry in the register to identify possible relatives acting as witnesses and places of residence , marital status and occupations, again, alot of registers are online, and some County Family History Groups may have also published a transcription.
The other option you have, because I think you said they were shoemakers, is to check Guild records, not as easy as the more usual sources but a possibility

[askyourgran]

Thanks dotty, the Probate records are from 1786 going back to 1661. Assuming I'm following the right family line

[dotty.]

I'm not sure what you mean, you've found some wills and admons for Lichfield transcribed or indexed online?

[askyourgran]

No I found a site on Ancestry which shows the Probate records, I can't actually look at them because I'm not fully paid up member, but the Litherland names are mentioned for Probate in 1786 1760 1723 etc and going back to1661. I'm not certain which town/county they are in. It seems that the families I have followed are mainly based in Leicester.

[dotty.]

Ok I have looked at those, they are a transcription of the index to wills and admons from the various Diocese including Lichfield which covers some of leicester, this is an example of what the actual entry gives you for each person:
Text: 1661 Litherland, Humphrey, Appleby Magna C. 134
Book: Calendar of Wills Proved and of Administrations Granted in the Commissary Court of the Peculiar and Exempt Jurisdiction of Groby, 1580-1800. (Will)
Collection: Leicestershire & Rutland: - Index To The Wills and Administrations Proved and Granted in The Archdeaconry Court of Leicester 1660-1750, and in The Peculiars of St. Margaret, Leicester, and Rothley and The Rutland Peculiars of Caldecott, Ketton and Tixover

[askyourgran]

Blimey that's complicated and doesn't seem to tell us much does it?

[dotty.]

hi again gran, sorry I went to bed! No it is only the transcribed entry from the Calendar of Wills and Admons and mainly gives the archive record location. Many of those I looked at are from the Peculiars not the main Diocese ( a peculiar is a jurisdiction of a manor or chapel that operated inside the georgraphical boundaries of a diocese but was not run by that diocese.

[askyourgran]

Ah, I thought it was likely I would find out what was left to whom etc. Wondered why ancestry put it on the website.
I'm getting quite addicted to this, I have sheets of paper with names and dates on that I haven't married up with anyone yet. But got a feeling this is not the way it is done.

[dotty.]

No it's not really the way it is done Gran, you work from the proven, verify you have the correct person from the known or proven research and then eliminate all possibles until you have the correct one. Having a bunch of names and dates only confuses you. Many trees on ancestry turn out to be filched from other researchers and not actually verified. Take care to be accurate, it may look good having loads of generations and lots of ancestors, but if it turns up you've made an error it is all pointless,

[askyourgran]

Thanks dotty that's what I was afraid of. I think maybe I'm going too fast. Loads of notes on people I can't fit in. What I can't get my head around is that I seem to have no-one in the 1820s.